export_egg

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds valuable context: 'Requires Application API key' (authentication requirement), 'admin action' (permission level), and details about the return format ('complete egg configuration including variables, install script, and Docker settings in the standard Pterodactyl egg export format'). This significantly enhances behavioral understanding beyond annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three sentences with zero waste: first states purpose and context, second details return format, third provides prerequisite guidance. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is front-loaded with the core functionality.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is complete: it explains what the tool does, when to use it, authentication requirements, return format details, and how to obtain parameters. The annotations cover safety aspects, and the description fills in the remaining contextual gaps effectively.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with both parameters clearly documented in the schema itself. The description references the parameters indirectly ('Use list_nests and list_eggs to find the nest_id and egg_id') but doesn't add semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the specific action ('Export an egg as JSON'), the resource ('egg'), the purpose ('can be imported into another Pterodactyl panel'), and distinguishes it from siblings like 'import_egg' (which does the reverse) and 'get_egg' (which likely returns different information). The admin action context further clarifies its scope.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit guidance is provided: 'Use list_nests and list_eggs to find the nest_id and egg_id' tells the agent exactly how to obtain required parameters. It also distinguishes from 'import_egg' (the inverse operation) and implies this is for administrative backup/migration rather than regular data retrieval like 'get_egg'.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.